0

I am wondering if the use of "are" in the last subordinate sentence is correct. It makes sense that 'are' refers to 'nodal cover depths' while I think the correct antecedent is the number defined as nodal cover depths.

Finally, figures 12 and 13 show the characteristics of the optimal solution obtained for test examples I and II, respectively, using CABAC in which the number in parentheses are nodal cover depths.

Improve this question
2
  • 4
    "... using CABAC in which the numbers in parentheses are nodal cover depths." At the core, it is saying "numbers... are... depths."
    – rajah9
    Commented Feb 10, 2017 at 17:34
  • 1
    You can use the singulars "the number" and "(the) nodal cover depth" with singular "is". Otherwise, use plural "numbers".
    – BillJ
    Commented Feb 10, 2017 at 18:20

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
0

Your sentence refers to two examples, I and II. The depth measurements in parentheses have numbers, not one number. The problem is not the word are but number, which should be plural.

Is there "the number defined as nodal cover depths" or are there numbers in the parenthese? If there may be different numbers shown, fix the sentence with "...in which the numbers in parentheses are nodal cover depths."

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .